By portraying itself as capable of transforming arid landscapes into thriving ecosystems, Israel echoes colonial narratives, writes Nandita Molloy [photo credit: Getty Images]
Instead of tackling the climate crisis or confronting Israel’s “environmental catastrophe” in Gaza, the world’s governments appear to have spent COP29 in Baku turning a blind eye and a deaf ear, convincing themselves that this widespread destruction isn’t happening.
As is now customary, the conference was mired in controversy and hypocrisy before it began. This time around, senior Azerbaijani officials were exposed trying to use the conference as a forum to decide fossil fuel deals, further undermining COP’s climate credentials.
Yet, after one year of accelerated genocide in Gaza and occupied Palestine, the display at the Israeli Pavilion sticks out as the most striking and shameful symbol of COP29’s collective failings.
This is Israel’s third pavilion at COP, following appearances at COP28 in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, and COP29 in Dubai, reflective of the occupation’s normalisation with certain Arab states. With 403 delegates, Israel has the seventeenth-largest delegation, just behind its close allies — the United States with 405 and the United Kingdom with 470 delegates. These figures emerge amid reports of numerous world leaders skipping the summit and Papua New Guinea withdrawing.
Expectedly, the Israeli pavilion framed itself around two delusions: “From Desert to Oasis” and “Climate of Innovation”, intended to showcase Israel’s ‘environment leadership’. In reality, this is not only misleading, but by portraying itself as capable of transforming arid landscapes into thriving ecosystems, Israel echoes colonial narratives, such as the French concept of “pénétration pacifique” in the Sahara which framed deserts as spaces for control, experimentation, and resource extraction.
How Israel uses COP to launder its image
One of the most prominent myths in Israel’s foundation is the idea that it made “the desert bloom.”
This industrial-focused narrative overlooks the environmental practices of indigenous Palestinian farmers, effectively erasing both their presence and their sustainable methods of land stewardship.
“The State of Israel cannot tolerate a desert within its borders. Should the state not eliminate the desert, the desert might eliminate the state”. David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of the State of Israel in a 1955 paper titled “The Significance of the Negev”.
This rhetoric mirrors settler-colonial attitudes seen elsewhere, such as in Australia, where the removal of Indigenous peoples in the 1960s led to ecological degradation, including uncontrolled wildfires.
Similarly, Israel’s framing of the desert as a site for rescue and settlement masks the rich histories and sustainability practices of local populations. In fact, Indigenous knowledge is crucial in the fight against climate change.
Subscribe Now and Listen to our Podcasts OnThe “From Desert to Oasis” theme at COP29 parallels historical European colonial justifications for land control. As early as 1897, Brigadier-General Percy Sykes described deforestation as a critical problem in desiccated regions, arguing that solving it would determine their future.
This framing, like Israel’s, disregards the historical sustainability of local communities and masks ongoing inequalities in resource access under the guise of technological progress.
The Zionist movement, a mix of Jewish nationalism and settler colonialism, has long viewed the desert as a threat to be addressed, as well as an empty, open space for settlement and land tenure. Israel’s presence is also an exercise to justify its “adaptation solutions” to “desertification,” as climate solutions.
Yet, these environmental solutions serve as a tactic to deflect attention and accountability from Israel’s ongoing 76-year occupation and the genocide of the Palestinian people — a form of greenwashing eagerly embraced by Western officials and governments as a sign of progress.
In particular, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change has praised Israel’s water innovations, highlighting the Kinneret-Negev Conduit, which transports water from the Sea of Galilee to the Negev Desert. In reality, however, this system relies on the exploitation of resources, strains transboundary water-sharing agreements, and exacerbates water scarcity in Jordan.
Israel’s long-standing partnerships with fossil fuel corporations like BP and Chevron further betray its green narrative.
These companies not only supply Israel’s energy needs but also indirectly fuel resource-driven conflicts that disproportionately harm Palestinian communities.
According to Oil Change International, such partnerships undermine COP29’s sustainability goals, raising questions about who truly benefits from these “sustainable” transformations.
This paradox is deepened by the support of Annex II countries like the United States and the United Kingdom, which prioritise military aid to Israel over meaningful climate finance.
Meanwhile, these same nations resist increasing contributions to the Global South. Redirecting funds from military budgets and fossil fuel subsidies could raise up to $5 trillion annually for global climate finance, highlighting the stark inequities at the heart of COP29’s discussions and fuelling further doubt about our collective survival.
Nandita Lal is an independent researcher on climate change and Indigenous People. She stood as an anti-war candidate in the General Election in the UK in July 2024
Follow Nandita on X: @ditalalmolloy
Have questions or comments? Email us at: editorial-english@newarab.com
Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff, or the author’s employer.